If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Quite frankly, any plan that purports to reduce the deficit while including even more tax cuts everywhere isn't being very serious. I'd rather take my chances with healthcare reform than sign on to an austerity measure that'll handcuff our future.

Bipartisan legislation is what will cure a lot of ills right now, we're not likely to see it with this bunch of knuckleheads. Neither side at the present can lay claim to doing good for all of us, I guess it's too important to push ideology from both perspectives rather than compromise for the good of all.

BTW, I'm really disappointed with the WH on this. What happened to the president sitting everyone down and ironing out a deal? Oh yeah, that be leadership.

It's OK Flips, I like it when you agree with conservatives also. Today it's a good thing......

Bipartisan legislation is what will cure a lot of ills right now, we're not likely to see it with this bunch of knuckleheads. Neither side at the present can lay claim to doing good for all of us, I guess it's too important to push ideology from both perspectives rather than compromise for the good of all.

BTW, I'm really disappointed with the WH on this. What happened to the president sitting everyone down and ironing out a deal? Oh yeah, that be leadership.

It's OK Flips, I like it when you agree with conservatives also. Today it's a good thing......

I wish there was a like option ala Facebook. I totally agree with everything you say here. Both sides are to busy attacking the other to actually do something important for the good of the country.

French writer Alexis de Tocqueville warned about when visiting this fledgling democracy in the early 19th century – that this "American republic will endure until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."

David Brooks Bemoans the Fact that We Didn't Have the Fiscal Cliff a Year Ago
Friday, 24 August 2012 04:33

He didn't use exactly those words, but that is one implication of his column on Paul Ryan's decision to not support the Bowles-Simpson deficit plan when he was a member of the deficit commission back in 2010. (Brooks attributes Ryan's action to his hope for a larger scale overhaul of Medicare. More cynical types might attribute it to his adherence to the Republican dogma of never supporting tax increases.)

Anyhow, fans of the Bowles-Simpson report might recall that it would have first put budget cuts in place in October of 2011. The projected deficit for fiscal year 2013 (Figure 2), which begins on October 1 of this year, is less than 4.0 percent of GDP. The people running around Washington worried about the end of the world fiscal cliff scenario are worried about tax increases and spending cuts that will shrink the deficit to 4.0 percent of GDP as of January 1, 2013.

The timing of the tax increases and budget cuts in the Bowles-Simpson scenario is obviously somewhat different than the fiscal cliff story, and it does assume a stronger growth path than we have actually seen, but it is more than a bit bizarre to see many of the same people who have been screaming about the horror of large deficits now terrified by the horror of large deficit reduction.

Just to be clear, deficits are needed now. There is nothing other than the budget deficit to replace the private sector demand we lost when the housing bubble collapsed. But you don't get to run around one day screaming the deficits are horrible and then turn around the next day and say we need them; or at least you shouldn't be able to do this and still expect to be taken seriously.

Bipartisan legislation is what will cure a lot of ills right now, we're not likely to see it with this bunch of knuckleheads. Neither side at the present can lay claim to doing good for all of us, I guess it's too important to push ideology from both perspectives rather than compromise for the good of all.

BTW, I'm really disappointed with the WH on this. What happened to the president sitting everyone down and ironing out a deal? Oh yeah, that be leadership.

It's OK Flips, I like it when you agree with conservatives also. Today it's a good thing......

I think people like the idea of bipartisan but not the actual nuts and bolts. Also in recent memory, bipartisan bills and concepts have been some of the scariest things that I can think of. The Patriot Act was bipartisan. Before the massive SOPA/PIPA protests they were both very bipartisan. The newer cyber security bills are pretty bipartisan. There are others but I'm kind of tired, so suffice to say bipartisan just means that different political parties buy into the idea. It is by no means a measure of a law's worthiness.

I think people like the idea of bipartisan but not the actual nuts and bolts. Also in recent memory, bipartisan bills and concepts have been some of the scariest things that I can think of. The Patriot Act was bipartisan. Before the massive SOPA/PIPA protests they were both very bipartisan. The newer cyber security bills are pretty bipartisan. There are others but I'm kind of tired, so suffice to say bipartisan just means that different political parties buy into the idea. It is by no means a measure of a law's worthiness.

All of those bills have a thread in common... And none of them involve accepting what can be done in reality for the country, vs wanting some sort of Ideal for one third of the country.

No bipartisan is not necessarily good, but it's a sign that our country is talking o one another... On top of that bipartisanship is so rare that you give three bills and you have I go back to something enacted a decade ago.

Last edited by flips333; 08-28-2012 at 12:37 PM.
Reason: what was i drunk.

Originally Posted by MrPoon

man with hair like fire can destroy souls with a twitch of his thighs.

I think people like the idea of bipartisan but not the actual nuts and bolts. Also in recent memory, bipartisan bills and concepts have been some of the scariest things that I can think of. The Patriot Act was bipartisan. Before the massive SOPA/PIPA protests they were both very bipartisan. The newer cyber security bills are pretty bipartisan. There are others but I'm kind of tired, so suffice to say bipartisan just means that different political parties buy into the idea. It is by no means a measure of a law's worthiness.

I was just saying that at some point the ideology BS needs to stop and the real work of running this nation for the good and preservation of that nation needs to start, not at all saying that these horses ***** won't find some way to **** it up.

I think at least in this specific situation we need to find solutions on what the electorate desires it's government to do for them, and then that government do those things in the appropriate manner. We don't need some ultra high security spy game bill, just a bunch of guys that can figure out how to balance a check book.....

I was just saying that at some point the ideology BS needs to stop and the real work of running this nation for the good and preservation of that nation needs to start, not at all saying that these horses ***** won't find some way to **** it up.

I think at least in this specific situation we need to find solutions on what the electorate desires it's government to do for them, and then that government do those things in the appropriate manner. We don't need some ultra high security spy game bill, just a bunch of guys that can figure out how to balance a check book.....

The only thing worse than paralyzing partisanship should be liberating bipartisanship. Usually when Congress can come together on anything we should all truly be afraid. Anything short of naming a post office building there should at least be some legitimate back-and-forth on these issues. Bills like the PATRIOT Act there was about three days before it was first introduced and when it was signed into law.

We can have legitimate bipartisanship and come together on issues. That doesn't scare me nor should it scare anyone, but the more likely type of bipartisanship scares me shitless.

But the electorate responds much more to partisan bickering than legitimate bipartisanship. Just look at Simpson-Bowles for instance, was there a legitimate outcry for that to be formed into legislation? No, there wasn't really much talk about it. If you don't watch the news, there is a good chance you think Simpson-Bowles is a restaurant.

The only thing worse than paralyzing partisanship should be liberating bipartisanship. Usually when Congress can come together on anything we should all truly be afraid. Anything short of naming a post office building there should at least be some legitimate back-and-forth on these issues. Bills like the PATRIOT Act there was about three days before it was first introduced and when it was signed into law.

We can have legitimate bipartisanship and come together on issues. That doesn't scare me nor should it scare anyone, but the more likely type of bipartisanship scares me shitless.

But the electorate responds much more to partisan bickering than legitimate bipartisanship. Just look at Simpson-Bowles for instance, was there a legitimate outcry for that to be formed into legislation? No, there wasn't really much talk about it. If you don't watch the news, there is a good chance you think Simpson-Bowles is a restaurant.

I'm not suggesting making legislation that isn't needed or doing it in a hap hazard fashion just so these bozo's can say they did it together, it has to have purpose and brother we have some purpose right now.

The part that really frustrates me is the lack of leadership, everywhere!

The finger pointing, partisanship and the lack of anyone with the sense to put an end to it is really quite telling of the depth of our disfunction.

Simpson-Bowles is just the latest incident that shows how little the government cares about the people they were elected to represent......

I'm not suggesting making legislation that isn't needed or doing it in a hap hazard fashion just so these bozo's can say they did it together, it has to have purpose and brother we have some purpose right now.

The part that really frustrates me is the lack of leadership, everywhere!

The finger pointing, partisanship and the lack of anyone with the sense to put an end to it is really quite telling of the depth of our disfunction.

Simpson-Bowles is just the latest incident that shows how little the government cares about the people they were elected to represent......

I don't think that you are but when I hear politicians are going to act bipartisan my first instinct would be to say they are going to act how I said not how you and I would like them to.

But to your last point, I agree with you point but I would also turn it backwards. The government cares about the people so little because the people care so little about the government. We pretend like we have a first amendment so that someone can say "**** you" on the TV and ignore that we have it so people can speak critically about the government and not be persecuted for speaking out against the authority. We care more about Jersey Shore than we do about C-SPAN. Even our political news is BS like Fox News and MSNBC. We simply don't care and I don't see that changing so the government will do whatever the **** it wants whenever it wants to do it.

I was just saying that at some point the ideology BS needs to stop and the real work of running this nation for the good and preservation of that nation needs to start, not at all saying that these horses ***** won't find some way to **** it up.

I think at least in this specific situation we need to find solutions on what the electorate desires it's government to do for them, and then that government do those things in the appropriate manner. We don't need some ultra high security spy game bill, just a bunch of guys that can figure out how to balance a check book.....

A truly bipartian bill of the wishy washy kind will lead to a long term, Japanese style recovery--only worse.

You can solve the crisis relatively quickly with a full-on austerity plan (which would be absolutely devastating in the short term) or a Keynesian plan with a full-blooded stimulus package. Obviously, I prefer the option with no collateral damage. but either way, I think we need to tackle this issue with a bulldozer, and not a lawnmower. and unfortunately, the Bowles Simpson plan looks like a broom to me.

I don't think that you are but when I hear politicians are going to act bipartisan my first instinct would be to say they are going to act how I said not how you and I would like them to.

But to your last point, I agree with you point but I would also turn it backwards. The government cares about the people so little because the people care so little about the government. We pretend like we have a first amendment so that someone can say "**** you" on the TV and ignore that we have it so people can speak critically about the government and not be persecuted for speaking out against the authority. We care more about Jersey Shore than we do about C-SPAN. Even our political news is BS like Fox News and MSNBC. We simply don't care and I don't see that changing so the government will do whatever the **** it wants whenever it wants to do it.

The media in general should be a wonderful thing, all of that information available 24/7 with just a mouse click. Problem is, at least as I see it, is that we haven't yet harnessed a constructive use for all of that information and the people that control the content of the media know this. Instead of just being a clearinghouse that can be used to form opinion, the media has it's own agenda, as does every other group that possesses enough power to propagate it's own existence.

Once these power structures attain this level, their usefulness to society on the whole is diminished. That's where we are at present. These are not new or original ideas on my part but in light of the current discussion worthy of note.

We probably have to take a step back, catch our breath and decide as a society how to process this information and then we can move forward with a little more purpose. Right now, all that I see the media doing is pandering to the causes of divide in this nation and not serving as the conduit that could be bringing objective information to the masses that would help form real solutions to the very serious problems that plague our nation.

You are absolutely spot on (if I'm reading you correctly) that the notion of constructive action and respect for our fellow man start at the individual level. Until we bring an end to the dishonesty we display towards each other, none of this is likely to change at all.....

Simpson Bowles is so bipartisan that the commission it's named for couldn't agree on it, leaving the chairmen to promote it in the absence of a majority vote in its favor. Good luck getting it through a larger body.